From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Peter Maydell Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] KVM call for 2017-03-14 Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2017 11:32:34 +0100 Message-ID: References: <87tw6y8bs8.fsf@secure.mitica> <6559d50e-b8d5-eaa2-4a14-48608644ad29@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Cc: Juan Quintela , QEMU Developer , KVM devel mailing list To: Thomas Huth Return-path: Received: from mail-wr0-f175.google.com ([209.85.128.175]:35012 "EHLO mail-wr0-f175.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750771AbdCNKc4 (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Mar 2017 06:32:56 -0400 Received: by mail-wr0-f175.google.com with SMTP id g10so120974905wrg.2 for ; Tue, 14 Mar 2017 03:32:55 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <6559d50e-b8d5-eaa2-4a14-48608644ad29@redhat.com> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 14 March 2017 at 10:24, Thomas Huth wrote: > On 13.03.2017 11:02, Peter Maydell wrote: >> Are we trying to be: >> . a dev platform before easy h/w availability? >> [not easy for QEMU for several reasons] > > What reasons exactly do you mean here? The main ones I had in mind are: * to do this you need really to have access to the specs for new hardware features early. If you wait for publication of official specs to start implementation then you won't be done until most of the "window" before h/w is available has already closed * you need to actually implement new features, which requires more work than we're currently putting in -- for instance for ARM we still haven't finished implementing virtualization emulation, and we haven't even started with v8.1 features yet * you need to do better testing than just "does it boot Linux?" if you're trying to provide a dev platform for people to use for developing Linux... thanks -- PMM